shafik added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/SemaCXX/cxx2a-consteval.cpp:812
+ fail1 = good0; // expected-error-re {{call to consteval function
'{{.*::copy<.*::foo>}}::operator=' is not a constant expression}} \
+ expected-note {{in call to
'&fail1->operator=(good0)'}}
+
----------------
aaron.ballman wrote:
> This likely has nothing to do with your changes here, but what the heck is
> with that leading `&` in this already-pretty-surprisingly-weird note? Is
> that aiming for `(&fail1)->operator=(good0)` for some reason?
Note, we also see a similar diagnostic in
`SemaCXX/constant-expression-cxx11.cpp` so this looks like it existed before.
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131479/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D131479
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
